LAS VEGAS, NEVADA—Infotainment systems have come standard on higher-end cars for several years, but GM is now making them a standard feature on its compact economy cars as well. And it's doing it by leveraging the hardware found in the $600 smartphone you likely carry in your pocket.

As announced during the Los Angeles International Auto Show in November, GM will equip its Chevrolet Spark minicar and Chevrolet Sonic subcompact with a new MyLink infotainment system. Beyond a fair-to-middling touchscreen, AM/FM radio, and optional XM satellite radio, MyLink relies on a Bluetooth-connected smartphone to power its GPS navigation features and to play non-radio music sources.

When it comes to audio, MyLink assumes you've already ditched CDs for MP3s, and that you probably listen to some kind of streaming service. MyLink displays track and "station" information on its 7-inch display, and it includes touch controls, which are relayed to your smartphone. Audio then gets streamed using the smartphone's data connection and is played back through the MyLink system. (Right now the only supported services are Pandora and TuneIn Radio, which link with Pandora or TuneIn Radio apps you have on your smartphone.)

Enlarge/ If you use TuneIn Radio on your smartphone, you can control the app using the new Chevy MyLink system.

Chris Foresman

"This drives down the cost of a typical infotainment system," a GM spokesperson told Ars. In other words, why pay for a typical $1,000 infotainment system when most drivers already have the necessary hardware in their smartphone?

Chevy's MyLink system is also the first to feature a "Siri" button. This steering wheel-mounted button will activate Siri on a connected iPhone 4S or iPhone 5, allowing the driver limited interaction with iOS's "intelligent assistant."

While connected to MyLink, Siri can make hands-free voice calls, play songs in iTunes, read or respond to text messages, check or add appointments or reminders, or get answers to "simple" questions. Ask complex questions, the kind that Siri would usually answer by displaying information from sites like Wolfram Alpha or Wikipedia, and Siri will instead say that the car won't let the service distract you that way.

Enlarge/ For now, voice control is only compatible with Siri on an iPhone 4S or iPhone 5.

Chris Foresman

"The point is to not distract the driver," a GM spokesperson told Ars. "The system is designed to limit Siri to spoken interaction. Anything that would take your eyes off the road would be bad."

Unfortunately, MyLink can't connect to the iPhone's built-in navigation system (or to Google Maps, for that matter). GM instead is rolling out its own BringGo navigation app for iOS and Android. The smartphone app stores map data (up to 2GB) on your smartphone and uses its GPS radios, but it otherwise relies on the MyLink 7-inch touchscreen to display maps and access controls. It can also look up points of interest using Google Local Search.

Unlike Apple's or Google's mapping apps, however, there are no voice prompts or controls—and the app is a salty $50 download. On the upside, the cached mapping data means you won't be stuck when driving in an area with sketchy cell reception. GM can also improve the system easily by updating the smartphone app instead of pushing out a complicated or potentially costly firmware update to the car's own computer.

Despite the drawbacks, it's clear that GM is listening to consumers. For instance, the user interface on the Spark and Sonic is vastly improved over the often-complicated interface in the similar system built into the much more expensive Chevy Volt. GM will be rolling out a different version of MyLink to its higher-end cars, such as the Impala, later this year.

Promoted Comments

Big step in the right direction -- why would anyone pay for the horribly-designed user interfaces that seem to be par for the course for in-car computers, given the choice of the beautifully-designed interfaces that are available on phones? The only thing that would make this announcement better would be more attention to open standards, so that there can be actual competition to bring us the best in-car information solution...

I take it they'll also be including free docking ports for all common phones, including the 30 pin, lightning conenctor, and micro USB to charge my phone while it's draining my battery, conveniently located near the driver so I can securely and safely dock my fone instead of draping a cable from the dash to some ramndon place...

I appreciate that you have your own GPS app GM, but I like mine better, why not integrate AirPlay and screen mirroring fully so i can run whatever gashbopard GPS app i want, or actually, you know, work with Apple and Google to natively integrate into their OS so any compliant app could be used, and also so your touchscreen communicates TO the app as an interface so i don;t have to pull my phone out to see lists of results before accpeting a route, or dealing with piss-poor speech systems that barely recognize me in the car given background noise.

Really, the in-dash GPS is an OPTION some people pay for, so taking it out isn;t saving you money, it;s costing you profits, and instead you;re takuing away core features that other people need who don;t have smartphones (or who might have a BROKEN ONE), while all the other car makers are just building in limited-use cellular radios so the car has it;s own contract-free infotainment connection (built into the cost of the car with highly limited data usage, like a kindle, that doesn't require monethly fees), or putting actual iPads right in the dash. Also, A2DP from a phone would have been cheap, but you shoudl still have native MP3 playback in the dash from USB and SD so other people can easily plug in or play music while my phone is in use (using my device for maps and theirs for music at the same time is likely not possible).

What I really hate is how an expensive car navigation system is usually a lot worse than a $100 garmin which also includes free lifetime map updates. I wonder if GM will release an API so anyone can make car apps for its cars rather than limiting itself to ios. It would be pretty cool if you could access all of the hidden sensor data, etc..

These integrated infotainment systems are being left in the dust by relatively cheaper technology that most of us carry around in our pockets. I'm surprised it's taken this long to start taking advantage of that technology rather than poorly try to approximate it. Still a ways to go, but a welcome direction.

This technology is ridiculously long overdue and really needs to find its way into more cars. Any computer built into a car will be overpowered by cell phone processors within 24 months (charitably); there's little reason you'd want to lock yourself into a car-specific computer and software (looking at you, Lexus). Take advantage of the hardware in people's pockets to make a more flexible, more powerful, cheaper car technology solution.

I wish this type of interface would find its way into cars I actually wanted to buy.

Big step in the right direction -- why would anyone pay for the horribly-designed user interfaces that seem to be par for the course for in-car computers, given the choice of the beautifully-designed interfaces that are available on phones? The only thing that would make this announcement better would be more attention to open standards, so that there can be actual competition to bring us the best in-car information solution...

Dedicated hardware buttons for specific devices -- let alone a particular device feature like Siri -- is one of those things that look stupid a few years down the road. Like controls for your truck-mounted CD-changer on your radio.

What they need is a programmable button that links to the voice control system on your phone, be it Siri, Google Voice, something from RIM or Microsoft, or the hot-new-feature-to-be-named-later.

Dedicated hardware buttons for specific devices -- let alone a particular device feature like Siri -- is one of those things that look stupid a few years down the road. Like controls for your truck-mounted CD-changer on your radio.

What they need is a programmable button that links to the voice control system on your phone, be it Siri, Google Voice, something from RIM or Microsoft, or the hot-new-feature-to-be-named-later.

These dedicated links always end up having a huge downside of being obsolete... Considering both siri and google now can be activated with a headset, I am not sure why this is not incorporated in this way...

Dedicated hardware buttons for specific devices -- let alone a particular device feature like Siri -- is one of those things that look stupid a few years down the road. Like controls for your truck-mounted CD-changer on your radio.

What they need is a programmable button that links to the voice control system on your phone, be it Siri, Google Voice, something from RIM or Microsoft, or the hot-new-feature-to-be-named-later.

I have no idea why this isn't standard already. Every bluetooth headset I've used has a "bluetooth button" that I can set to do something different depending on the device it's connected to. Why can't a freaking car do what a $15 earpiece can?

I take it they'll also be including free docking ports for all common phones, including the 30 pin, lightning conenctor, and micro USB to charge my phone while it's draining my battery, conveniently located near the driver so I can securely and safely dock my phone instead of draping a cable from the dash to some ramndon place...

I appreciate that you have your own GPS app GM, but I like mine better, why not integrate AirPlay and DLNA, screen mirroring, Etc fully so i can run whatever dashbopard GPS app i want, or actually, you know, work with Apple and Google to natively integrate into their OS so any compliant app could be used, and also so your touchscreen communicates TO the app as an interface so i don't have to pull my phone out to see lists of results before accpeting a route, or dealing with piss-poor speech systems that barely recognize me in the car given background noise.

Really, the in-dash GPS is an OPTION some people pay for, so taking it out isn't saving you money, it's costing you profits, and instead you're takuing away core features that other people need who don't have smartphones (or who might have a BROKEN ONE), while all the other car makers are just building in limited-use cellular radios so the car has it;s own contract-free infotainment connection (built into the cost of the car with highly limited data usage, like a kindle, that doesn't require monethly fees), or putting actual iPads right in the dash. Also, A2DP from a phone would have been cheap, but you should still have native MP3 playback in the dash from USB and SD so other people can easily plug in or play music while my phone is in use (using my device for maps and theirs for music at the same time is likely not possible).(edited for grammar)

I was excited until I saw that it won't connect to Google Maps (on either iOS or Android?). That's a big missing piece for me. The whole point of using the smartphone is to take advantage of more current technology. I'm not too confident in GM's maps software being able to keep up.

What I really hate is how an expensive car navigation system is usually a lot worse than a $100 garmin which also includes free lifetime map updates. I wonder if GM will release an API so anyone can make car apps for its cars rather than limiting itself to ios. It would be pretty cool if you could access all of the hidden sensor data, etc..

Yes--I think update subscriptions and the large expense of adding the option in cars isn't a technological issue, but rather part of the auto retail business model. Like many other types of options, adding a nav/entertainment system and its hefty markup is a good profit center for the dealers and manufacturers.

The BYOD model is an excellent option--no hardware tied to a specific vehicle type, or user. Also much cheaper to deal with when something goes wrong...

This technology is ridiculously long overdue and really needs to find its way into more cars. Any computer built into a car will be overpowered by cell phone processors within 24 months (charitably); there's little reason you'd want to lock yourself into a car-specific computer and software (looking at you, Lexus). Take advantage of the hardware in people's pockets to make a more flexible, more powerful, cheaper car technology solution.

I wish this type of interface would find its way into cars I actually wanted to buy.

Though i completely agree, THIS is the wrong way to do it. It still rel;ies on phone-side apps and provides only the most limited interface, and is still 100% dependent on the phone being conencted. \

What it SHOUDL be is: a limited system capable of moderate software updates of it's own that runs a standards compliant communication system to talk to apps of all kinds, but still can perform the majority of functions independent of the phone. MP3 playback, hosting an in-car Wireless network, connecting concurrently to at least 4 bluetooth devices (not one at a time), and providing a rudamentary GPS, ability to respond to calls on any connected device, a basic radio, and manage all the basic in-car features (HVAC, interior lighting, etc) These are features that will not age or become obsolete in any short time. Making this system modular is important so it can be forklift upgraded in say 8-10 years, or swapped out with more full-blown upgraded standalone infotainment systems, without losing control of the in-car features.

It shoudl talk to ANY app that uses it;s communication language. The touchscreen shoudl be able to display any apps content, and send BACK data to the app. But, the car (being solf powered) should definetly have the GPS chip and not drain phone batteries to do guidance. It needs an OS to manage so much already, adding simple processing systems like GPS, media playback, etc are extremely minimal. Limited voice command can also be available with or without a phone.

That said, it shoudl be EXTENSIBLE to whatever an attached phone can do. If it doesn;t know a voice command, it shoudl send it to the phone and see if it does. Phone apps that can bbe used in motion should appear on screen as icons, or be able to send data to widgets on screen. Any user in the car shoudl have radio access (if permitted by the driver), and be able to send media into the in-car system in both audio and video through AirplAy, DLNA, and the later addition of other protocols.

It would be trivial to have the WiFi and BT board in the car be independent of the radio, allowing a software upgrade to accomodate future topologies easily. Since gigibit would be a given wired in, and there's no reason anyone might ever tax that backbone, there's pleranty of growth noom in network performance going to 802.11ac, or it;s future replacement, as well as BT 5, NFC2, etc, without having to replace the car's main computer. It shoud be extensible, modular, standards based, and upgradible, and be able to do most in-car things without NEEDING a phone. Then when a phone is present, it would talk to the phone's calendar, contacts, messaging services, and more (and multiple phones concurrently if authorized), plus, anyone with a phone and a compliant app could push any additional content to the screen they want, which would show up as an app icon, a fullscreen app that uses the touchscreen and/or voice for input, or shows widget data on screen. Also all device notifications would optionally pull through. This would require less performance than current cellphones, only slightly more than most cars have had for years. So long as the back end (that talks to the HVAC/etc) was also standards comp0liant, or at least open for licensing, users could replace this radio easily for less than a few hundred bucks, as well, or add internal storage and more functionality, BD playback, and more.

Not just to swim against the current, but off the top of my head, I can think of few poorer places to dump development resources than 'in-car infotainment'. Sheesh, a vehicle get you from Point A to Point B, everything else is just fluffr and eye-candy to provide the marketer's with a 'new and improved'. model year sticker that does nothing to improve the efficiency or utility of a vehicle. Scrap the crap, and drop the price of the car a few thousand, or put the effort into making a better vehicle, not a toy laden ego bucket.

Not just to swim against the current, but off the top of my head, I can think of few poorer places to dump development resources than 'in-car infotainment'. Sheesh, a vehicle get you from Point A to Point B, everything else is just fluffr and eye-candy to provide the marketer's with a 'new and improved'. model year sticker that does nothing to improve the efficiency or utility of a vehicle. Scrap the crap, and drop the price of the car a few thousand, or put the effort into making a better vehicle, not a toy laden ego bucket.

I whole heartedly disagree. Drwosy and distracted driver accidents account for HALF of all the major car wrecks in the USA. Without a cempetent radio system that plays music the driver LIKES (not the crap on the air today), and with a quality GPS unit that gets routine (cheap or free, not $400, fuck you chrysler Mygig!) map updates, we're going to have a lot more accidents. Adding in advanced voice controls is also critical. Doing so in a manner that allows the technology in the car to be advanced without forklift upgrades is just a good idea.

As far as THIS idea, i do not like the implementation. it's a cop out placing the cost and responsibility in the consumer's hands, and not actually even providing the same interface. This could reaily be done much better would GM just actually work WITH Apple and Google instead of hacking together something to avoid royalty payements.

Wow! Hey, I already use my iPhone as the infotainment center in my seven year old car, so I can absolutely see how this could be great! I'll get even better integration with my car then I already have, right?

Quote:

Siri will instead say that the car won't let the service distract you that way.

Meh... That actually sounds a bit annoying, especially if the car is parked... but I guess I can see that as a valid safety issue. Tell me more...

Quote:

Unfortunately, MyLink can't connect to the iPhone's built-in navigation system (or to Google Maps, for that matter). ...

Uh oh... that's obviously less then perfect, but that must mean they have a really great alternative, right?...

Quote:

...GM instead is rolling out its own BringGo navigation app...

Okay. So, it's like the other iOS map apps I've used, with live data and such... right?...

Quote:

...stores map data (up to 2GB) on your smartphone ...

Wait... I have to store all that data on my phone?!? Which means that if someone else wants to borrow my car, they have to download that same 2GB of data to their phone too! Who would even bother?

Quote:

...Unlike Apple's or Google's mapping apps, however, there are no voice prompts or controls...

This deal is getting worse by the second... but with all those weaknesses, obviously this crappy app of theirs is going to be free, right?...

Quote:

—and the app is a salty $50 download.

And... no?!?!?

Wow... that deal went from "promising" to "vaguely interesting" to "less then optimal" to "no chance in @#%$", and mostly within the scope of a single paragraph! So what numbskull at GM actually thought this would be a good idea?

I have been waiting for a car manufacturer to copy/license/partner with Pioneer and use their AppRadio for a while. A Co-Worker of mine uses Google Maps with an iPhone 4s just fine. I haven't tried it with an android device but my quick hands on made me want one.

A tiny step in the right direction. Strip cars of radios, speakers, amps, infotainment. Offer cabling and open interfaces where customers stick in their expected level of quality speakers/amps, the smart phone/tablet in their pocket. At best add a display of larger size (miracast) and some control device that can be used instead of a touch screen?

Then let users bring their phone and apps.

Extend your system to driver seat position/temperature/mirror postion/volume settings and make that phone the key for entry and start button as well.

Why? Because the infotainment/nav tech is obsolete in 3-5 years, but the car should last 15 yrs. !!! Not to mention that it would be great to have a single UI for all this from home to car to phone to work place (even hotel/rental car).

A2DP/AVRCP is really all you need, you shouldn't be looking at the damn display so if it's 4" or 10" shouldn't matter. It's a nice open standard and should work no matter who makes your phone or stereo (a bazillion version of Bluetooth means this may not be true in the real world, but that's easier to fix than trying to come up with yet another new standard that's only implemented by one manufacturer).

- A standard docking solution that all phones can and do support. Not the proprietary Apple docking.

- Accelerometers built into the car. Built in GPS knows that the car generally did not move since it was turned off and that if the accelerometers indicate acceleration, it is because the car moved. This makes it easier to find the current location - assume the same as when it was turned off and try that. It also makes it possible to track the cars motion in tunnels and other places where GPS cannot be received.

-The car should provide a display, speakers, microphone, and input buttons to the phone. The apps should be phone based.

-The user should be able to save car prefeences like mirror position and seat position in the phone. Then when the user puts the phone in, the settings will be reset.

A2DP/AVRCP is really all you need, you shouldn't be looking at the damn display so if it's 4" or 10" shouldn't matter. It's a nice open standard and should work no matter who makes your phone or stereo (a bazillion version of Bluetooth means this may not be true in the real world, but that's easier to fix than trying to come up with yet another new standard that's only implemented by one manufacturer).

My BMW has the current track listed on the HUD so I can change it via the steering wheel controls without looking that the Center Console......Can even scroll through the list, while looking at the road....

So they assume (correctly) that I've ditched CDs, but not modulated analog radio frequencies?

There is always the chance that your smartphone is broken and/or the TuneIn radio app cannot pick up a particular local station which may have news and weather information that is pertinant to the driver. I think a radio of some sort is always a good minimum. Plus, if you forget your phone or you lend your car out, there is always something on.

I agree that the direction and intent is the right one but the implementation is lacking. I'm sure someone at GM was protecting profits from integrated map updates etc and thought this would be a good idea. If it worked without the phone then it might be excusable (or does it, it was called an 'app.') To give them the benefit of the doubt however, downloading an app with local storage does solve a problem for buyers who don't have or want a smartphone and data plan. Or who are on slim data plan allowances. If you can download the app on an iPod Touch then it serves a purpose. I would prefer the option of using whatever app you want (or at least Apple or Google Maps) however.

I don't see the benefit of car makers building their own systems. Unless someone comes up with a system that they can sell to every auto maker, then why bother? It's not like I will buy my next car based upon the entertainment system.

Give me a CD slot, a USB slot, a volume nob and controls to navigate the content of my USB key, all physical buttons, not touch screen stuff.

I don't use GPS and I don't plan on answering my phone while driving, so the rest of the stuff is totally useless for me, I may be old school, but that works for me! My smartphone already have limited battery life as it is, don't ask it to become the heart of my radio system in the car...

A2DP/AVRCP is really all you need, you shouldn't be looking at the damn display so if it's 4" or 10" shouldn't matter. It's a nice open standard and should work no matter who makes your phone or stereo (a bazillion version of Bluetooth means this may not be true in the real world, but that's easier to fix than trying to come up with yet another new standard that's only implemented by one manufacturer).

My BMW has the current track listed on the HUD so I can change it via the steering wheel controls without looking that the Center Console......Can even scroll through the list, while looking at the road....

I can do that in my VW, but it doesn't work with Bluetooth - for that requires an update of the module on my particular vehicle. It does work on some VW vehicles and I would assume Audi as well, given that relationship. I just end up using my iPod tucked away in it's special compartment in the console, however. Wireless service isn't reliable enough in my area for Pandora or the like and I'd prefer not to spend my bandwidth allotment on that anyway. It supposedly works with any PlaysForSure compatible device as well, but since it came with the adapter for the iPod, I just went that way. Now the only problem is my lack of a Windows or Apple OS at home to run iTunes and get music on the iPod in the first place. Luckily, I'm in IT, so it's not a problem syncing from a Windows machine at work.

Though i completely agree, THIS is the wrong way to do it. It still rel;ies on phone-side apps and provides only the most limited interface, and is still 100% dependent on the phone being conencted. \

What it SHOUDL be is: a limited system capable of moderate software updates of it's own that runs a standards compliant communication system to talk to apps of all kinds, but still can perform the majority of functions independent of the phone. MP3 playback, hosting an in-car Wireless network, connecting concurrently to at least 4 bluetooth devices (not one at a time), and providing a rudamentary GPS, ability to respond to calls on any connected device, a basic radio, and manage all the basic in-car features (HVAC, interior lighting, etc) These are features that will not age or become obsolete in any short time. Making this system modular is important so it can be forklift upgraded in say 8-10 years, or swapped out with more full-blown upgraded standalone infotainment systems, without losing control of the in-car features.

I see the value in what you suggest, but I'm also deeply suspicious of something that contains too much functionality. I don't like the idea of the lighting and AC being controlled by a modular computer. When I see the word "modular" in this context, I think of "stealable." The nice thing about having a car radio being separate from everything else is that I could continue to control my AC if some guy stole the car radio. If I can replace it easily, I imagine a thief could probably just as easily take it. Maybe I'm being paranoid and there are ways around this, but that's the first thing that comes to mind. Phones are nice, I take it with me so I don't worry about anyone stealing it.

I also don't really want the hassle of maintaining another piece of electronics, I don't want to upgrade firmware, OS, protocols, etc. I do enough of that on the stuff I have and really not enough time to keep up with it honestly. What happens when a car manufacturer doesn't put FLAC in its computer, but my phone now carries them? Do I really need to update yet another piece of equipment with the codecs?

Honestly, what I want is a big 7" touchscreen in the car that does nothing except mirror the phone's display (I think Ford does something like this?). Something with an NFC type / magnetic phone charging dock (like the non-existant Google Charging Orb) built in so I could just plop my Nexus 4 down in a dock and the big screen would just light up. Then people could simply program car-specific apps for the phone that would look much nicer on the large format. If car manufacturers want to, they can code specific apps for the phone that look good on the big console, but it's still just an option.

It's not that I don't see the value in your suggestions, it just exhausts me thinking of yet another computer in my life. I just want to extend something that I already think has the majority of the functionality I need.

A2DP/AVRCP is really all you need, you shouldn't be looking at the damn display so if it's 4" or 10" shouldn't matter. It's a nice open standard and should work no matter who makes your phone or stereo (a bazillion version of Bluetooth means this may not be true in the real world, but that's easier to fix than trying to come up with yet another new standard that's only implemented by one manufacturer).

My BMW has the current track listed on the HUD so I can change it via the steering wheel controls without looking that the Center Console......Can even scroll through the list, while looking at the road....

The road might be "in your field of view", but you sure as hell ain't looking at it if you are scrolling through a list of tracks. It's marginally better than looking at a center console, but you're still not paying attention to the road.

What I really hate is how an expensive car navigation system is usually a lot worse than a $100 garmin which also includes free lifetime map updates. I wonder if GM will release an API so anyone can make car apps for its cars rather than limiting itself to ios. It would be pretty cool if you could access all of the hidden sensor data, etc..

Although an open API for a car would be beneficial for controlling entertainment & navigation functions, it could have more sinister implications if it reached into core functionality of the car, leaving the system vulnerable to hacks and potential safety issues.

For example, if sensor data were available, then it is not out of the realm of possibility to conceive of intercepting, altering and feeding invalid data back into the core computer, causing the car to operate outside the bounds of safety. Even nominally innocuous things like control of HVAC could result in hacks that cause the heat to come on full-blast when it is hot outside, or vice-versa.

As a result, I imagine that car manufacturers will (and should) guard their core computer systems with the utmost care in order to ensure a car remains a car and does not become a node in a botnet...